Supreme Court Overrules High Court, Mandates Rehearing in Bail Cancellation Case

Apex Court Criticizes Allahabad High Court's Use of Witness Protection Scheme as a Substitute for Bail Cancellation

In a significant judgment, the Supreme Court of India has set aside an order from the Allahabad High Court, directing it to rehear the application for cancellation of bail in the case of Phireram v. State of Uttar Pradesh. The Supreme Court criticized the High Court's reliance on the Witness Protection Scheme, 2018, as an alternative to the judicial process for bail cancellation, emphasizing that both mechanisms operate in distinct legal domains.

The case stems from an appeal by Phireram, the original complainant, who sought the cancellation of bail for the accused, alleging that they were threatening witnesses. The Allahabad High Court had previously disposed of the bail cancellation application by suggesting that the complainant pursue protection under the Witness Protection Scheme, 2018. This approach was deemed erroneous by the Supreme Court, which highlighted that the Witness Protection Scheme is not a substitute for the established legal provisions under the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) or the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023.

The Supreme Court underscored the necessity for judicial oversight in ensuring compliance with bail conditions and preventing their breach. Justice J.B. Pardiwala and Justice Sandeep Mehta, who presided over the case, noted that the administration of threats to witnesses by the accused should be independently adjudicated by the court, rather than relegating the complainant to the Witness Protection Scheme.

The judgment elaborated on the distinct purposes served by bail cancellation and witness protection. While bail cancellation serves a preventive judicial function, witness protection under the scheme is curative, aimed at allowing witnesses to testify without intimidation. The court asserted that the two should operate in tandem to ensure a fair trial.

Emphasizing the importance of a fair trial and witness protection, the Supreme Court remarked that witness testimony forms the backbone of judicial proceedings. It cautioned against the High Court's practice of treating the Witness Protection Scheme as an alternative remedy for bail cancellation, noting this could undermine the integrity of judicial proceedings.

The Supreme Court has directed the Allahabad High Court to rehear the application for cancellation of bail on its merits, taking into account the two FIRs registered by witness Chahat Ram, who reported threats from the accused. The High Court is required to pass an appropriate order within four weeks, following a report from the Investigating Officer and hearings with all parties involved.

In its decision, the Supreme Court has also expressed concern over the recurring practice in the Allahabad High Court of issuing templated orders that equate the Witness Protection Scheme with bail cancellation. The apex court has instructed the Registry to circulate the judgment to all High Courts and specifically to the Chief Justice of the Allahabad High Court to address this issue.

This judgment reinforces the principle that bail conditions must be strictly adhered to and that violations should be dealt with judicially, ensuring the sanctity and fairness of the trial process.

Phireram v. State of Uttar Pradesh, (SC) : Law Finder Doc id # 2773398